migrate Exch. 5.5 Standard to Exch. 2003 Enterprise possible?

[zephyran]

We're currently running an NT 4 domain with Exchange 5.5 Standard Edition. Next year, we'll be upgrading to Windows 2000 AD (the licenses are already purchased, we've just been waiting for the money to replace antiquated hardware). Once the AD domain is established, I intend to migrate to Exchange 2003.

However, our vendor told me we have to purchase the Enterprise edition to get the X.400 connector we use to link our two sites (he said we can't get it by just buying Standard Edition and getting the connector license separately). I intend to perform the "Move-Mailbox" method of migration, since you can't do an in-place upgrade from 5.5.

My question is, does anyone know of any problems migrating an Exchange organization on 5.5 Standard, to servers running 2003 Enterprise? Also, though MS says it's okay, has anyone seen problems putting 2003 Enterprise on a Windows 2000 Standard (member) server?

 

[znetbiz]

The main issue you may run into is the memory size. The standard version supports less memory then the Enterprise version and does not support the 3gb switch . If you put to much memory and, the machine may become unstable.

 

[zephyran]

Well, we're going to be putting the Enterprise version on a server with 784MB of RAM, so I don't expect to have any problems with too much RAM.

 

[SirJay]

Haven't done it for real yet, but we were looking into the easiest way to migrate 5.5 enterprise to 2003, wanting to do a parallel install, and found one fairly straight forward way that seemed to work a few times smoothly using Backup Exec 9.

I imagine if you've got a very tidy or fairly simple NT4 environment, ADMT should be fairly straight forward - simply setting up the trusts and installing the site connectors, and then just moving across the user accounts and the mailboxes.

When we tried NT -> 2k we had some issues with it not bringing across some user accounts or mailboxes (not ness. matching either). no log entries, etc, noone could find any reasons (MS), and just suggested in my case to do a fresh install. Using BE did the same thing. 2003 ADMT did a little better, but still lost a few accts.

Exchange 2003 must run on a 2003 server, so given the wierd 2000 AD issues we had, you might find it better to use a 2003 AD instead. Has anyone else experienced anything similar?

 

[zephyran]

I have another question I'd like to add, to anyone with experience in this kind of migration (new Exchange 2003 servers added to an existing 5.5 Organization and mailboxes moved).

We have several users (myself included) with a different user account for each of our two physical sites (they're on the same NT4 domain) so they can log in at each site without having to wait for their profile to load across the WAN link. However, each has one Exchange mailbox (the Organization also spans across both sites) that they access from either site using Outlook. I set this up by creating a special Global group for each user, adding both their accounts to that group, and then setting that group as the Primary Account for their Exchange mailbox.

With the integration of AD in Exchange 2003, will this configuration still be valid? If not, is there another way I can accomplish the same result? Thanks again!

 

[DannoSV]

Just want to note that Exchange 2003 does not require Windows 2003 Server.

We are currently running Exchange 2003 on Windows 2000 Servers.

However, you cannot run Exchange 2000 on a Windows 2003 Server.

In respect to the first post, as previously stated you will not get the memory management advantages available with WIN2K03 Advanced Server. However, adding more RAM than can be used by the server/application will not cause it be unstable. However, it will waste dollars.

I have only migrated 5.5 to E2K03 server in a test environment without problems.

 

[M3John]

Danno,

When you migrated 5.5 to E2K3, did you perform and upgrade or export the CSV file to E2K3 and convert to a .pkl? Trying to replicate a sample migration. thanks.

 

[SIRANDA]

Again, this is a question to DannoSV. Could you please share your experience on migrating 5.5 to 2k03. I have E5.5 runs on Win2K domain that needs to be upgrade to E2k03. Thanks.-

 

[phuturetech]

Danno - you might have Ex2K3 running on 2000 but it isn't supported by MS.

 

[Marcs41]

Yes it is supported, why would it not!?!?

Marc
[sub]If 'something' 'somewhere' gives 'some' error, expect random guesses or no replies at all. Please specify details.
Free Tip: The F1 Key does NOT destroy your PC![/sub]

 

[zephyran]

It's in the system requirements that you can run Exchange 2003 on Windows 2000 SP3:

http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluation/sysreqs/2003.asp

In my case, would it be easier and/or less problematic to upgrade the Exchange servers to Exchange 2000, and then to 2003?

I don't want to have to recreate or build a new Organization. I just want to do what will ultimately result in a straight upgrade from 5.5 to 2003 on the same servers I'm currently running for Exchange (even if the actual work done isn't a straight upgrade). I want to avoid reinventing the wheel if possible.

 

[Marcs41]

If you want to move to 2003, you better do it now instead of an upgrade, you will have less to worry about.

Marc
[sub]If 'something' 'somewhere' gives 'some' error, expect random guesses or no replies at all. Please specify details.
Free Tip: The F1 Key does NOT destroy your PC![/sub]